Articles by Clark Williams-Derry

Pollsters aren’t asking the right questions about energy issues

There's more to this article than the headline, but the headline alone says quite a bit: "Poll: 8 in 10 want drivers to drop SUVs." That's another tentative -- though possibly shallow -- sign that high gas prices are turning Americans against their gas guzzlers. Of course, since SUVs, trucks, and minivans have commanded roughly half of the new-vehicle market in recent years, one wonders if this means that 3 in 10 people want other drivers to drop their low-mileage vehicles.

Other poll responses are equally telling. Seven out of 10 respondents want the government to fight rising gasoline bills by establishing price controls. Of course, holding down prices makes us consume more gas than we otherwise would. Plus, in a world of limited petroleum supplies, price controls could lead to all sorts of other problems -- shortages, rationing, etc. (As The Washington Post's Robert Samuelson reminds us, Cheap Gas Is a Bad Habit.)

Seven out of 10 also support new government spending on transit. But almost six in 10 now think it's more important to explore for new sources of energy than to protect the environment; and five in 10 favor opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development, up from just 42 percent earlier in the year.

EPA loophole could allow pesticide testing on kids

Just take a look at this San Francisco Chronicle headline:

EPA rule loopholes allow pesticide testing on kids

That's right -- if this story is to be believed, the EPA has created a loophole that would allow the pesticide industry to test whether its wares are safe by using real, live kids.  

But astonishingly, the real story is actually even uglier than that. According to the Chronicle, the EPA rules -- allegedly designed to protect kids and pregnant women -- specifically allow testing on "children who have been abused and neglected." Just read:

[W]ithin the 30 pages of rules are clear-cut exceptions that permit:

-- Testing of "abused or neglected" children without permission from parents or guardians.

-- "Ethically deficient" human research if it is considered crucial to "protect public health."

-- More than minimal health risk to a subject if there is a "direct benefit" to the child being tested, and the parents or guardians agree.

Read the story -- I'm not making this up.

102nd use for a dead cat

Turn it into biodiesel.

This smells a bit like a hoax. But perhaps it's not: after all, if you can turn turkey guts into biodiesel, why not felines?

And, come to think of it, why stop with cats?

A bonanza of energy-related stories in The New York Times

Today's New York Times has a bonanza of energy-related stories -- some tied to the most recent price increases triggered by Katrina and others to some longer-term trends ...